In fact, compared to the NBA -- by popular accounts, a much less "traditionalist" league -- the NFL's treatment of its vocal Christian players plain stinks. For example, the NBA's Kevin Durant has mentioned Christ in thanks after every nationally televised win for four years running (as an OKC fan, I know). Dwayne Wade, who like Tebow spends much of his off-court time with children with cancer, talks openly about the Holy Trinity having motivated his choice of jersey number (3). During last season's playoffs, league commentators repeatedly flashed a picture of a college-aged Kendrick Perkins serving Catholic Mass as a nearly grown-up altar boy, without a hint of derisive commentary (and the topic even became an issue mentioned innocuously and with constructive interest throughout the series). All of these instances witnessed not a single carbuncle of anti-Christian sentiment. Could it be that the NFL is just the more secular-progressive, without being the more pandering, league?

Dr. [Jule] Eisenbud, who said he wanted to make it clear that he thought the first volume of the Kinsey report was a "magnificent job," said he had no quarrel with the statistical methods used, but with the fact that Dr. Kinsey indulged in "unjustifiable, illegitimate manipulation of the data" in drawing what he called "implicit inferences..."

Dr. [Margaret] Mead criticized Dr. Kinsey for handling the subject of sex "as an impersonal, meaningless act," and for perpetuating the Puritan attitude prevalent in this
nation. She called this attitude "extraordinarily destructive of interpsychic and interpersonal relationships..."

"Even more dangerous is the assumption that new norms can be created by a statistical study of the actual sex practices of the day. Here we have the modern sociological approach to the problem of norms reduced to its final absurdity... all we need in the future is an accurate Gallup poll. That would be the final triumph of a 'scientific' civilization.'

A courageous, ex-Jewish Romanian turned into a man of God is imprisoned and tortured by the communists for his beliefs for 14 years. Later he writes this engrossing book delving into Karl Marx's life and the early roots of communism. It's called Marx and Satan by Richard Wurmbrand.

Quote: Under communism, the Russian religious landscape consisted mainly of two competitors—a severely repressed Russian Orthodox Church and a heavily promoted atheist alternative to religion called “scientific atheism.”

Under these circumstances, one might expect the rapid spread of religious disbelief, but the intensity of the atheist campaign originated from official mandate and not popular appeal. In turn, scientific atheism never inspired the Russian population and grew increasingly uninspired as Soviet officials created a monopoly “church” of scientific
atheism in hopes of replacing persistent religious beliefs and practices. This article is dedicated to explaining why Communists could not successfully convert the masses to atheism. The findings provide evidence that systems of belief require more than simply the power of promotion and coercion to become accepted. - end quote

From the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion the following article:

As many observers of the Soviet Union noted, convinced Communists demonstrated a conviction to their doctrine that was remarkably similar to religious faith (see Berdyaev [1931] 1966;
Berlin 1996; Kaariainen 1989; McDaniel 1996; Zaehner 1986).

Scientific atheism, the official term for the Communist Party’s philosophical worldview, posited the ultimate purpose of human existence, a moral code of conduct, and created a collection of atheistic rituals and ceremonies that mimicked religious ones. In addition to developing this ersatz religion, Soviet officials heavily promoted scientific atheism. The doctrine was taught in schools, advocated in the media, and
emphatically propagandized in books, posters, the arts, during holidays, and with celebrations. Convinced atheists could join atheist organizations and meet on a regular basis in lieu of church
participation; the primary atheist organization was the League of Militant Atheists, which was active prior to World War II and later replaced by the Knowledge Society. All in all, scientific
atheism was omnipresent in the daily lives of Communist citizens. Atheist propaganda and rituals, in combination with the brutal repression of Russian religious groups, produced an atheistic
“church” similar to a state-supported religious monopoly. Nonetheless, a belief in God remained a steadfast conviction for the majority of individuals throughout Soviet Russia. And the number
of convinced atheists virtually disappeared after the fall of communism. How could a doctrine that had so much going for it fail to gain widespread appeal? In sum, scientific atheism lacked
plausibility due to the recruitment tactics employed by the Soviet government and inconsistencies in the doctrine itself. - end quote

Paul Froese is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Baylor University

looks like wikipedia links are also allowed... let's give it a try then..

Oh the atrocities of Christians... Such poor people died because of wicked beliefs in GOD... looks like some of these people gave their life away for advancement of science and the wicked Christians weren't able to brake them down.

A representative of the American Humanist Association noted that population levels were much lower during the Inquisition than, say, the period of Stalin’s or Mao’s purges. This was a point I made in my original article. But our humanist friend also noted that the technology of homicide is much more lethal in an era of weapons of mass destruction. Never mind that Stalin and Mao didn’t use any of those weapons. They relied on primitive techniques of murder, such as forced relocation, forced labor, and forced starvation. Besides, the caveats of our humanist colleague hardly change the overall calculus. The best estimates are that between 5,000 and 10,000 were killed in the Spanish Inquisition. That’s compared with 100 million who were killed in the atheist purges of the twentieth century. The 100 million is actually a low figure, since it uses very modest estimates for how many people Stalin and Mao killed, and it leaves out a host of lesser atheist tyrants such as Pol Pot and Enver Hoxha. Even so, using this conservative estimate, a quick calculation reveals that atheist regimes killed ten thousand times more people in the space of a few decades than the Spanish Inquisition managed to kill over a period of more than two centuries.

This is to remind people that this thread is a place to post articles that you think would be of interest to other RGT readers, so we delete posts that are off-topic. Also, please refrain from argument by quotation--if you want to post a rebuttal article, that is fine, but if it goes beyond that then just make a new thread discussing the topic at issue.

"I have frequently challenged believers to produce a single professional historian who agrees with their thesis, but not one has been able. Could the historical revisionism be another example of their long-practiced art of pious fraud?"

A rather short book by John Wesley Hanson. Printed in 1875, this book written by John Wesley Hanson offers a thorough examination of the meaning of the Greek word AIÓN -- AIÓNIOS, translated Everlasting but really denotes "limited duration."

Even the preface quoted here is short:

The verbal pivot on which swings the question, Does the Bible teach the doctrine of Endless Punishment? Is the word Aión and its derivatives and reduplications. The author of this treatise has endeavored to put within brief compass the essential facts pertaining to the history and use of the word, and he thinks he has conclusively shown that it affords no support whatever to the erroneous doctrine. It will generally be conceded that the tenet referred to is not contained in the Scriptures if the meaning of endless duration does not reside in the controverted word. The reader is implored to examine the evidence presented, as the author trusts it has been collected, with a sincere desire to learn the truth.

(1) If empirical data is taught, only such data which has been verified or is currently capable of being verified by observation or experimentation shall be taught. Data with the appearance of empirical data which has never been verified and is currently incapable of being verified shall be identified as nonverifiable when taught orally or in writing;

(2) If scientific law is taught, written textbooks statements identified as scientific law shall have no known exceptions of verified empirical data;

(3) If scientific theory is taught, the theory shall be identified as theory when taught orally or in writing. Empirical data and conjecture may be presented to support taught theory where considered instructive. As used in this subsection, the term "theory" shall mean theory or hypothesis;

(a) If a scientific theory concerning origin or destiny is taught without the teaching of opposing scientific theory, the taught theory may be criticized by the teaching of conflicting empirical data where considered instructive;

(b) If scientific theory concerning biological origin is taught in a course of study, biological evolution and biological intelligent design shall be taught. Other scientific theory or theories of origin may be taught. If biological intelligent design is taught, any proposed identity of the intelligence responsible for earth's biology shall be verifiable by present-day observation or experimentation and teachers shall not question, survey, or otherwise influence student belief in a nonverifiable identity within a science course;

(c) If scientific theory concerning biological origin is taught in a textbook, the textbook shall give equal treatment to biological evolution and biological intelligent design. Other scientific theory or theories of origin may be taught;

...

(9) "Scientific theory", an inferred explanation of incompletely understood phenomena about the physical universe based on limited knowledge, whose components are data, logic, and faith-based philosophy. The inferred explanation may be proven, mostly proven, partially proven, unproven or false and may be based on data which is supportive, inconsistent, conflicting, incomplete, or inaccurate. The inferred explanation may be described as a scientific theoretical model;

"At this point, it should be noted that many in the early Church who were Universalist cautioned others to be careful whom they told about Universalism, as it might cause some of the weaker ones to sin. This has always been a criticism of Universalism by those who think that people will sin with abandon if there is no threat of eternal punishment. In fact, modern psychology has affirmed that love is a much more powerful motivator than fear, and knowing that God loves each and every person on the planet as much as God loves you does not promote delinquency. Conversely, it is Christian exclusivity that leads to the marginalization of other human beings and the thinking that war and cruelty to the "other" are justified since they're going to Hell anyway! This kind of twisted thinking led to the persecution of the pagans, the witch hunts, the Inquisition, and the Holocaust.

"Biblical references to nature were not scientific statements, which then might be said to be in conflict with scientific data, observations, and theories. The Bible uses the common, everyday, universal language of appearances."

James Fowler, Ph.D. is a developmental psychologist, a United Methodist layperson, and Director of the Center for Faith Development at Emory University. He is the premiere pioneer of the study of Faith development, and his book Stages of Faith (Harper & Row, 1981) is a ground-breaking classic. His work with Faith research is of great importance to the study of transpersonal psychology in that, he posits, faith (moreso than religion, or belief) “is the most fundamental category in the human quest for relation to transcendence.”